Non-profit

Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis

Location:

CLEVELAND, OH

Tax ID:

45-4244605

Tax-Exempt Status:

501(c)(3)

Budget (2016):

Revenue: $2,279,632
Expenses: $2,052,357
Assets: $798,483

Contact InfluenceWatch with suggested edits or tips for additional profiles.

The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis is think tank that conducts research relating to economic and environmental issues with the goal of accelerating the transition to renewable energy. They are heavily funded by left-of-center and/or environmentally-focused private foundations.

IEEFA has repeatedly opposed the use of nuclear energy. 1  2 3

Opposition to Nuclear Energy

Nuclear power plants produce no carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gas emissions, and as of 2021 accounted for 19 percent of American electricity production—the largest source of zero carbon electricity in the United States. 4 An October 2018 proposal from The Nature Conservancy noted that zero-carbon nuclear plants produced 7.8 percent of total world energy output and recommended reducing carbon emissions by increasing nuclear capacity to 33 percent of total world energy output. 5

IEEFA has repeatedly opposed the use of nuclear energy.

In April 2022, IEEFA opposed a Biden administration plan to spend $6 billion to keep American nuclear plants in operation. Explaining the project, U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said that “nuclear power plants contribute more than half of our carbon-free electricity, and President Biden is committed to keeping these plants active to reach our clean energy goals.” The Associated Press, citing the Department of Energy, reported that hydrocarbon fuels were used to replace recent premature closures of nuclear facilities, and that this tradeoff had led to “a rise in emissions” and “poor air quality” in the affected communities. According to the AP, an IEEFA spokesperson “said he wishes the federal government, before it allocated the $6 billion, had analyzed whether that money might have been better spent on ramping up renewables, battery storage and energy efficiency projects.” 6

In July 2022, IEEFA criticized the European Union Parliament for considering a proposal to adopt carbon free nuclear power within the EU’s taxonomy of environmentally sustainable economic activities. In a statement from IEEFA, the group’s European director of energy finance studies accused the EU of becoming vulnerable to “greenwashing” and failing to protect consumers and investors from the financial risks of “toxic nuclear projects.” 7

In June 2023, IEEFA issued a news release criticizing KEPCO, South Korea’s public electric utility, for having “renewable energy capacity of 2.4%” that was “vastly small” in comparison to Germany and China. A chart in the release showed that KEPCO had increased the share of its carbon free nuclear generation to 29.8 in 2022, compared to China (2.2 percent nuclear) and Germany (1.8 percent), and was planning to build new reactors. The IEEFA statement criticized KEPCO’s recent increase in nuclear generation as presenting “safety risks” and advised against building new reactors. 8

In March 2016 IEEFA released a report criticizing a proposal to build 12 nuclear reactors in India and proposed instead that the energy be obtained from solar panels. 9

References

  1. McDERMOTT, JENNIFER; and MATTHEW DALY. “Biden launches $6 billion effort to save distressed nuclear power plants.” Associated Press. April 19, 2022. Accessed August 23, 2023. https://www.kmbc.com/amp/article/biden-distressed-nuclear-power-plants/39765635
  2. “Labelling nuclear and gas as “green” or environmentally sustainable poses a risk for investors and communities across Europe.” Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. July 6, 2022. Accessed August 23, 2023. https://ieefa.org/articles/labelling-nuclear-and-gas-green-or-environmentally-sustainable-poses-risk-investors-and-0
  3. “KEPCO’s fossil fuel reliance limits options for reform.” Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. June 16, 2023. Accessed August 23, 2023. https://ieefa.org/articles/kepcos-fossil-fuel-reliance-limits-options-reform
  4. “Nuclear explained.” U.S. Energy Information Administration. Accessed July 25, 2023. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/us-nuclear-industry.php
  5. “The Science of Sustainability.” The Nature Conservancy. October 13, 2018. Accessed July 25, 2023. https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-insights/perspectives/the-science-of-sustainability/
  6. McDERMOTT, JENNIFER; and MATTHEW DALY. “Biden launches $6 billion effort to save distressed nuclear power plants.” Associated Press. April 19, 2022. Accessed August 23, 2023. https://www.kmbc.com/amp/article/biden-distressed-nuclear-power-plants/39765635
  7. “Labelling nuclear and gas as “green” or environmentally sustainable poses a risk for investors and communities across Europe.” Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. July 6, 2022. Accessed August 23, 2023. https://ieefa.org/articles/labelling-nuclear-and-gas-green-or-environmentally-sustainable-poses-risk-investors-and-0
  8. “KEPCO’s fossil fuel reliance limits options for reform.” Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. June 16, 2023. Accessed August 23, 2023. https://ieefa.org/articles/kepcos-fossil-fuel-reliance-limits-options-reform
  9. “IEEFA Study: India Plan to Build 12 New Nuclear Reactors Is Economically Unviable, Fraught With Risk.” Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. March 30, 2016. Accessed August 23, 2023. https://ieefa.org/articles/ieefa-study-india-plan-build-12-new-nuclear-reactors-economically-unviable-fraught-risk
  See an error? Let us know!

Nonprofit Information

  • Accounting Period: December - November
  • Tax Exemption Received: February 1, 2013

  • Available Filings

    Period Form Type Total revenue Total functional expenses Total assets (EOY) Total liabilities (EOY) Unrelated business income? Total contributions Program service revenue Investment income Comp. of current officers, directors, etc. Form 990
    2016 Dec Form 990 $2,279,632 $2,052,357 $798,483 $41,811 N $2,226,946 $52,650 $36 $157,700
    2015 Dec Form 990 $1,754,156 $1,670,857 $604,342 $74,945 N $1,590,250 $163,675 $231 $168,062 PDF
    2014 Dec Form 990 $1,502,969 $1,401,904 $469,268 $23,170 N $1,425,450 $76,825 $644 $159,025 PDF
    2013 Dec Form 990 $1,020,590 $675,557 $393,006 $47,973 N $992,702 $27,500 $388 $102,108 PDF

    Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis

    3430 ROCKY RIVER DR
    CLEVELAND, OH 44111-2954